Is this a trick where you post an item from 1999 and we all think it's recent? This seems completely pointless -surely anyone able to code HTML is also able to copy and paste a Css file from somewhere?
I don't think it's a trick at all, and I wish I knew about it years ago. The web is like that: tons of crap that's easy to find and lots of gems that you find, then lose, then maybe find again. (Sort of like visiting a really good used bookstore: you need to browse and hope to get lucky.)
Some of the styles are not to my taste, but three or four of them are clean and simple and easy to read. They provide someone with no CSS a head-start. They provide someone with little design skills a head-start. How is this bad? (As for linking to a CSS file: the good thing here is that the authors explicitly offer them up for re-use. It's a bit underhanded to just find a website you like and "borrow" its CSS wholesale.)
"Some of the styles are not to my taste, but three or four of them are clean and simple and easy to read. They provide someone with no CSS a head-start. "
Yes and no. It's probably better than nothing, but nowhere near as good as using something that considers layout as well, such as 960gs, jQuery-ui, Typogridphy, YUI, Blueprint, and so on.
The CSS, much like the markup used in the sample doc, is more "Here's my thesis" than "Here's my Web site/app". And that's clearly related to the age of content.
The CSS, much like the markup used in the sample doc, is more "Here's my thesis" than "Here's my Web site/app". And that's clearly related to the age of content.
More Web sites should take the "Here's my thesis" approach.
All fair points, though many people still write web sites with just pages, rather than web applications. (I do, for example.) Still, I agree that some kind of layout for columns would be great. As a non-designer, however, I find most of the grid systems immediately overwhelming. (For example, I'm looking now at the front page of 960gs, which I didn't know, and I want to cry. I have zero idea what I should or could do with that.)
"For example, I'm looking now at the front page of 960gs, which I didn't know, and I want to cry. I have zero idea what I should or could do with that."
I've been using 960gs quite a bit. It fairly simple (or at least it seems so now).
This is such a strange idea, I could definitely see this helping people, but the people it would help probably wouldn't know this existed as an option.
It will help me. Truly good design requires focused, skilled attention. But things like "core styles", blueprint, and the YUI stylesheets move the standard of "good enough" a little bit closer to that ideal. It's awesome for a developer working on an MVP.
These are quite nice. Only one thing gives away their age. Every choice is fluid. The Web seems to have reached an informal consensus that having a maximum or fixed width for lines of text is a "Good Thing™"
I always assumed that was laziness on the part of the designers, and decided to make my layouts as fluid as possible as a result. But, since I'm more of a code guy than a CSS guy, I'd end up spending hours perfecting the layout, instead of developing, and I'd end up setting max-width and min-width anyway (to wide ranges, something like 600 to 1500px, but I'd use em). I also always used em for units, in case the user was using large fonts. I always hated a site with lots of text that fixed its width to something small like 550px, until I found out about the Readability bookmarklet.
So, 1: is there a good reason not to use fluid layouts? 2: What should a code guy like me do to minimize time spent designing prototype fluid layouts, before I'm ready to pay for design?
I'm not sure; I enjoy playing with these pages, resizing my browser window down until it's perfect for me, rather than having the width predefined. But I might be strange that way (and most users won't even know how to resize their windows...)
I like to maximize whatever window is in focus to minimize visual clutter. (one of my pet hates about Safari and Mac OS in general is it's aversion to full-screen windows.
As I've ranted about before multiple overlapping windows solve more problems than they create. Give me a single full-screen window plus the option to occasionally tile 2 (or 4) windows for those few occasions when I need that.
This is the end of a long road that started with the the combined popularity of RSS readers, Readability, Instapaper, Safari Reader, and all those cookie-cutter blog templates.